newsobserver.com projects - Tom Coburn - Comments

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

MDLNB — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:30:04 -0400

Neo: You are doing a great job of explaining how this bill will ruin the country, but you are preaching to folks that have no common sense. These are just some easily led libtards that are easily glamored by people like Obama that will promise anything to get their support and then turn on them in a minute. They are too dense to see it. They don't want to believe that their messiah would/could possibly lie to them. The facts are blatantly clear so it is not the way you are explaining,it is their lack of brain power to see the impending crash rushing to smack them right in the head. They will still be standing there confused after it is all over. When this thing fails, they will still be blaming Bush or Reagan. They take no responsibility and that's why they prefer to be led around with a ring in their nose. Even the Democrats know that this plan won't work, and if they are more scared of the voter than they are of Pelosi, this bill won't be passed.

Re: Spitting in the Wind

neo_mom — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 13:02:22 -0400

That was my point. Because LASIK is not covered by insurance and is an out of pocket expense (that is still costs more than glasses is irrelavent) means that it is subject to true market forces. It (and elective plastic surgery - also not covered by insurance) has come down in price over the last decade while the costs of everything else medical have increased.

Re: Spitting in the Wind

bnartist — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:17:19 -0400

LASIK is a red herring not only because it is an elective but because vision correction is not covered by typical private insurance plans. For insurance coverage of eye care a supplemental vision plan is typical, with limited benefits and even if LASIK is covered the benefit is at best a discount or a fixed out of pocket cost which is still more expensive than corrective lenses.

Re: Spitting in the Wind

neo_mom — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 22:03:55 -0400

So you claim LASIK is a bad example because of one person? Tragic for that one person, but yes, he should have known the risks. I did. Not everything bad that happens in our lives means we get to sue somebody for a lot of money to make up for it.

You are also correct that LASIK is more expensive than glasses it was worth every penny. I was legally blind without my glasses which were heavy and bulky - even with titanium frames and super-polymer lenses. I was unable to wear contacts. Now - 11 years later, I am 20/40 without glasses and I am sitting here typing without wearing glasses. I only use them for driving.

Re: Spitting in the Wind

bnartist — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:45:04 -0400

LASIK is a red herring because it's an elective that's more expensive than glasses and can damage your eyes. I know a man who is legally blind because of laser eye surgery and who lost a lawsuit over it because the defense argued that as a retired actuary he should have understood the risks.

Spitting in the Wind - Part Deux con't

neo_mom — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:08:53 -0400

COBRA drives the cost up? Really? The insurance company receives the same money. Calling portability uless *and* claiming to be for freedom? How many sides of a mouth can you talk out of?

I'll admit to clumsily getting my COBRA point out. I was trying to point out that COBRA really didn't help portability because it is so expensive. What would better help with portability is to wean us off of employer-based group coverage. You know, really transform the market. Change the tax code so we can deduct all of our medical expenses - not just after we pay 7.5% of our adjusted gross income. Then if we change jobs, it doesn't affect our insurance at all. "Unleash" the markets from the standpoint of getting rid of state coverage mandates and allow us to choose our options - ala carte - that are best for ourselves and families. Allow us to purchase from other states. Have a catastrophic option. And for those that really need help because they are "uninsurable", then have some government help to just help those folks out. And means test for Medicare and Social Security. Markets do work - look at Lasik Eye Surgery. I was in the FDA study on it in 1997 and it cost $3000 per eye. Because it isn't covered by insurance and there is true competition the prices are down to between $500-$750 per eye now.

"We needed a solution yesterday, but we didn't get it, because we were distracted with unnecessary wars against a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. "

Red Herring not worthy of response

"The agenda *is* known:
- insure more people"

How can more people going for services (with the same number of docs) cost less?

"- give people the FREEDOM of choice between their employer's plan and other, public, no-profit options."

Then how about getting rid of all the mandates of "approved" plans where if any changes happen your old plan gets dumped? How about getting rid of the part where it is cheaper for your employer to dump you onto the government role than keep your private plan? How the hell are those FREEDOM or CHOICE?

"- get things going before August because the status quo has a multi-billion dollar war chest, built with higher premiums and denied care, to replace elections with public relations and smear campaigns. The GOP did their part to stall, and now the paid activists are doing theirs."

You can't be serious. ObamaCare supporters are putting together a $160MM ad campaign for September. John McCain spent $126MM over the course of his entire campaign. WHO has the money again?

"6 months of good analysis and debate would help, but the GOP has no interest in providing either. They have confused "analysis" with campaign contributions and "debate" with fear mongering."

Fear mongering? Like the crap about life expectancies and the over-stated number of people without insurance and the can't-quite-reconcile talking point that lack of insurance = assurred death? Please.

"Right now, decisions are made by corporate insurance drones who deny everything without any thought, requiring the patient and doctor make a case for treatments that should be covered. Burr's plan keeps this in tact by maintaining the status quo of private insurance."

I'd take fighting an insurance company any day over fighting the Feds. At least I have some recourse with a private company. Remember the old "You can't fight city hall?" And as we can see here in Raleigh, the government is full of benevolent and honest angels looking out for your best interest, right?

Like I said - spitting in the wind..... But I admire Don Quixote

Spitting in the Wind - Part Deux

neo_mom — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:49:48 -0400

OK RonB -

"She claims to want to "focus on the 12-15 million that are chronically uninsured" .... Obama's plan goes far to fix this with the government option avaiable to everyone."

Why does everyone need this option if they are already covered?

"The "innovations" she wants to attribute to our existing system do not come from the existing health care system. Patient care is as good (or worse) here as it is in Canada, England and other countries with "socialized medicne". The "innovations" have come from the rich from the rest of the world paying what would be a lot to anyone else but a drop in the bucket to them to get the best treatments. Meanwhile the rest of us pay more and have shorter life expetancies than the rest of the world."

See my earlier posts with actual FACTS about the fuzzy math of life expectancies. Not to mention that our lifestyle choices don't have any impact on those either right? It's all about insurance? Please.

Regarding innovation. Have you ever had an ultrasound or and ECG or a CT scan or an MRI or a PET scan. If you have thank the innovation of the markets. Especially the US medical equipment and drug markets. You think that the government worked to develop the algorithm that can detect subtle arythmias in and ECG? Nope. It was a little company called Marquette Medical. They spent a boatload to create the product and made a boatload off of it later. And have saved countless lives since. How about the 64-slice CT that can clearly image your beating heart (and the rest of your body). Or the PET scanner that can isolate your cancer for targeted surgery and radiation therapy. Advanced mammography? Vascular ultrasound? All developed by companies competing in the market putting money into R&D hoping to make a profit at the end. You think the Feds can do that? Really?

What about new drugs? Do you know ANYTHING about what it costs or takes to bring a new drug to market? Have you ever dealt with the FDA? I didn't think so. How about you put down the talking points for a few minutes and get some facts. Like how it can take more than 10 years in R&D and clinical testing and government approvals that can hundreds of millions of dollars - if it even makes it to market? Then you risk finding a rare side-effect in the general population (100's of thousands) that wasn't found in the clinical trials (5000) and get sued for a couple hundred million. The Vioxx effect. The drug that a helped millions aleve their pain but was pulled because less than 10 people had a severe reaction actually caused by the drug and died.

"It is amazing that "managment bonuses" and "shareholder dividens" didn't make her list of why healthcare costs are going up, even though they are by far the most costly reasons. "

Really? The CEO at Pfizer took a total compensation last year of $13.7 Million including bonus. I'm not sure how many major drug companies there are, but lets call it 10. To account for VP bonuses - lets just round it to say $40 Million per company for a total of $400 Million - double it even to a Billion, quadruple it for effect to $2 Billion. A large number you say? Yes, I agree. But quite paltry compared to the estimated $100 Billion that is driven by excessive CYA testing. Or the over $36 Billion year to date in estimated Medicare fraud. I don't think that "management bonuses" are "by far the most costly reasons."

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

MDLNB — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:44:45 -0400

Well, you can tell that RonB either didn't do his homework and read 3200, or he is so far up Bama's ..... Anyway Ronny, Mac Daddy be proud of you buddy. You swallowed the whole lie.
You left out how much it was going to cost. Duhhhh!
You forgot the part in the plan that leads to a one payer universal socialist system.'
You still haven't caught on yet. The doctors and hospitals charge a lot. They have to be paid. Insurance companies pay them for you. If you pay cash, you have to pay more than if you pay through insurance. That's a fact that I can prove. I have proof right here in the statement from my wife's last operation.
You are just so full of Bama that you can't do your own thinking.
Obama said and I quote "maybe that (senior) doesn't need that hip replacement. We can just give him a pain pill". He said it. He also said" maybe (that senior) doesn't really need a pace maker at his age...just give him a pill". This is the guy you are championing, buddy. Can you believe a guy that says, "doctors will amputate a foot off to make a little extra money"? Sounds kind of like rationing, huh?
You are kind of arrogant when it comes to false indignation and taking up for the poor. You don't understand that the rest of us are also concerned. Just not enough to put our families in ruin to fix things. Instead of crashing through the door, why not check to see if it is unlocked?
You wonder why conservatives (and in this case Independents and most Democrats) get upset with your (liberal) reckless attitude.
Bama's plan will eventually put private insurance out of business. He knows it, but I can't understand why you don't understand that. If you put them out of business, you have the same problem as now, millions out of work. Why are you not all up in arms against the high price of doctors and hospital care? Duhhhh! Didn't think about that. Bama didn't tell me to be concerned about that.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

captainjack — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:20:30 -0400

Yet the question remans: The Dems are in control and have the votes to pass health care reform - so why haven't they?

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

senex24 — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:08:56 -0400

I am sorry I guess the quote from the story above is incorrect ---
"You don't need to stimulate competition," Burr told about 30 people at the Crabtree Rotary Club. "What you need is to unleash the markets."

Unfortunately since he is running for re election we will see more and more elightened quotes.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care "plan"

RonB — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:05:58 -0400

As much as I'd like to, I can't let neo_mom's post go any longer.

She claims to want to "focus on the 12-15 million that are chronically uninsured" but Burr's plan doesn't do this. They are uninsured because they have been deemed "uninsurable" by the unleashed health insurance industry. Obama's plan goes far to fix this with the government option avaialbe to everyone.

The "innovations" she wants to attribute to our existing system do not come from the existing health care system. Patient care is as good (or worse) here as it is in Canada, England and other countries with "socialized medicne". The "innovations" have come from the rich from the rest of the world paying what would be a lot to anyone else but a drop in the bucket to them to get the best treatments. Meanwhile the rest of us pay more and have shorter life expetancies than the rest of the world.

It is amazing that "managment bonuses" and "shareholder dividens" didn't make her list of why healthcare costs are going up, even though they are by far the most costly reasons. Or expensive drugs that are pushed through an underfunded FDA only to find that they do more harm than good. And a Republican-created Medicare prescription drug plan that lets drug companies sell in bulk and deny selling at bulk discounts. Obama's plan fixes this, and the drug companies are on board.

COBRA drives the cost up? Really? The insurance company receives the same money. Calling portability uless *and* claiming to be for freedom? How many sides of a mouth can you talk out of? This is why no one takes you seriously other than other right-wing tools who think the heatlh care industry's plan with Senator Burr's name on it is a good idea. And the "malpractice insurance" boogie man. I'm sure she and others like her want doctors to not pay insurance or be held accountable for their mistakes. Renaming death panels "councils" does not make them magically exist. Sorry.

We needed a solution yesterday, but we didn't get it, because we were distracted with unnecessary wars against a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

The agenda *is* known:
- insure more people
- give people the FREEDOM of choice between their employer's plan and other, public, no-profit options.
- get things going before August because the status quo has a multi-billion dollar war chest, built with higher premiums and denied care, to replace elections with public relations and smear campaigns. The GOP did their part to stall, and now the paid activists are doing theirs.

6 months of good analysis and debate would help, but the GOP has no interest in providing either. They have confused "analysis" with campaign contributions and "debate" with fear mongering.

Right now, decisions are made by corporate insurance drones who deny everything without any thought, requiring the patient and doctor make a case for treatments that should be covered. Burr's plan keeps this in tact by maintaining the status quo of private insurance.

The only "patients rights" the GOP is delivering is the right to pay more for less.

We fix the parts that need fixing by electing officials who listen to their constituents and pass real reform to take the motiviations of profit and greed out of the buisness of improving the health of every American. The majority has spoken and deserves to be listened to. Instead they get yelled at health insurance representatives, the members of congress like Senator Burr they paid for, paid protestors, and duped individuals that like to protest but hate knowing what they are protesting about.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

RonB — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:52:34 -0400

Hopefully this will show to everyone once and for all just how out of touch Senator Burr is with reality.

Unleash the market? Unleashing the market is exactly what we have now -- higher premiums and co-pays for less service. How can it get any unleash-ier?

Tax benefits? Republicans? Ha. I can't laugh hard enough. It is a sad smokescreen to directly fund the existing inefficient, for-profit insuers as payback for campaign contributions.

I'd ask Mr. Burr this at a town hall, but he has continued his 5 years pattern of not listening to the people of North Carolina. Just like Elizabeth Dole did.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

MDLNB — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:49:57 -0400

Like I said before, what difference does it make who has the greater infant mortality rate? Liberals want to improve infant mortality how?.....ABORTION.

Libtards, why don't you go back to trashing, rather than fight over something that just makes you look even more stupid. At least your Democrat brothers are smart enough refrain from that argument.

Exactly what did you expect from Burr? He knows we don't like the Socialist plan so he is trying to find a compromise to get us safely away from disaster. For some reason, you have succumbed to Mac Daddy's fear mongering and think that the world will surely end if we don't pass this thing by the end of the year. Give me one good reason that this bill can't wait until the beginning of next year? You haven't fooled anyone. The bill is so bad that it can't stand on it's own merit, so it has to be rushed through before anyone can analyze it and discover how really dangerous it is.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

sky5714 — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:00:21 -0400

senex24 -
Read Sen. Burr's bill - it's been posted by me here & on other stories. You keep repeating that Burr's done nothing ("seat warmer"), and that his only idea for HC reform is to let the markets loose - that's not true.

The tactic of repeatedly issuing untruthful statements about conservative opponents is just not working anymore. Read his bill (it's only 248 pgs, unlike the 1,000 pg treatise drafted by Pelosi-ites & her insurance company exec's & big PhRMA execs), then come back & make a substantive critique of his ideas.

Re: Burr plugs GOP health care plan

senex24 — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:16:31 -0400

the point is that Mr Burr as a United States Senator should be more than just a seat warmer for the GOP. If his only response to the bank failures of last fall was to pull money out of an ATM it shows a lack of understanding of the Banking Industry and the FDIC. If his health care plan is to simply let the markets loose, then we should really be worried about this deep thinker